Long-Term Socio-Ecological Research in the Biosphere Reserve in Mapimi, Mexico: A Multidimensional Participatory Observatory of Rangeland/Pastoral Systems

Since the creation of the UNESCO Biosphere Reserve Mapimi (BRM) in Mexico 45 years ago, pastoralism has undergone a series of transformations. Upon the arrival of the Spaniards, horse breeding flourished until 1900; thereafter extensive cattle production lasted for six decades. Only recently, farmers have adopted alternative management types for organic meat production. National and international efforts to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) require basic, applied, and participatory research efforts. In the socio-ecological pastoral system BRM, first halophytic ecosystems were examined for their ecohydrological role in rangeland productivity. In 1996, a long-term ecological research site was installed to monitor the effects of herbivores on the composition and biodiversity of desert communities. Shortly thereafter, the National Commission of Natural Protected Areas began a rigorous monitoring and conservation program to guarantee both the sustainable management of natural resources and the sustainable development of reserve dwellers. Soon international multisectoral institutions joined Mexican efforts to protect the natural, cultural, and social diversity of the BRM and to strengthen its socio-ecological resilience to climate change and land degradation. Hence, the BRM is currently a space of participatory monitoring and research, with emphasis on the health of this important socio-ecological pastoralist system. It is examined whether institutional programs promoting organic livestock farming are compatible with this desert system and how biological soil crust is developing as a fundamental indicator of soil functioning and the provision of ecosystem services and human wellbeing. The formation of multisectoral partnerships to foster dryland sustainability have led to the foundation of the International Network for Dryland Sustainability; it is currently coordinating a national network of participatory socio-ecological observatories (PSEOs) to promote the SDGs. Mapimi is one of the first PSEOs to promote local governance and social and ecological sustainable development in the drylands of Mexico and world-wide

Participatory Observatories to Connect Multifunctional Landscapes, Link Smallholder Farmers, and Collectively Diversify Income

Cattle ranching was introduced to Baja California, Mexico (semiarid and arid climates) by the Spaniards, who brought the animals and the techniques. One important activity was moving livestock from the mountains (forests and few kinds of grass) to the coast crossing poor shrublands known as chaparrals. Fire was a common practice to promote grass growth and pastoralists could move through the land freely. Pastoralism became a common practice when English workers built the Ensenada port and became ranching landowners. They followed the practice of livestock movement through the exorreic watersheds. Native Indians, as well as other Mexicans known as ejidatarios, who had access to communal land, and wealthy livestock managers learned the same transhumance practices. They followed them until recently when privatizing the land began fragmenting the rangeland by installing fences; besides insecure places emerged due to illegal crop production. The Guadalupe watershed in Baja California is an interesting place to study rangelands as dynamic socio-ecological systems driven by institutional changes. Its land-use history has provoked interesting questions oriented to enlighten the future of livestock and rangeland management. This talk deals with the project of a citizen\u27s observatory where results from good local land and water management practices are being compiled and presented in a portal for its out-reach. The internet site will also make available scientific papers translated into infographics to make high-quality information accessible. Before and after special techniques like keyline design, holistic management, and other locally adapted techniques are being measured by ranchers and students as a citizen science program. We think that co-monitoring and improving data availability will facilitate local decision-making and deal with the multifunctionality of future rangelands in a better way

Broader Impacts for Ecologists: Biological Soil Crust as a Model System for Education

Biological soil crusts (biocrusts) are a complex community of algae, cyanobacteria, lichens, bryophytes, and assorted bacteria, fungi, archaea, and bacteriophages that colonize the soil surface. Biocrusts are particularly common in drylands and are found in arid and semiarid ecosystems worldwide. While diminutive in size, biocrusts often cover large terrestrial areas, provide numerous ecosystem benefits, enhance biodiversity, and are found in multiple configurations and assemblages across different climate and disturbance regimes. Biocrusts have been a focus of many ecologists, especially those working in semiarid and arid lands, as biocrusts are foundational community members, play fundamental roles in ecosystem processes, and offer rare opportunities to study biological interactions at small and large spatial scales. Due to these same characteristics, biocrusts have the potential to serve as an excellent teaching tool. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the utility of biocrust communities as a model system in science education. Functioning as portable, dynamic mini ecosystems, biocrusts can be used to teach about organisms, biodiversity, biotic interactions, abiotic controls, ecosystem processes, and even global change, and can be easy to use in nearly every classroom setup. For example, education principles, such as evolution and adaptation to stress, or structure and function (patterns and processes) can be applied by bringing biocrusts into the classroom as a teaching tool. In addition, discussing the utility of biocrusts in the classroom &ndash; including theory, hypothesis testing, experimentation, and hands-on learning &ndash; this document also provides tips and resources for developing education tools and activities geared toward impactful learning.</p

Unforeseen plant phenotypic diversity in a dry and grazed world

23 páginas..- 4 figuras y 7 figuras.- 50 referencias y 90 referenciasEarth harbours an extraordinary plant phenotypic diversity1 that is at risk from ongoing global changes2,3. However, it remains unknown how increasing aridity and livestock grazing pressure—two major drivers of global change4,5,6—shape the trait covariation that underlies plant phenotypic diversity1,7. Here we assessed how covariation among 20 chemical and morphological traits responds to aridity and grazing pressure within global drylands. Our analysis involved 133,769 trait measurements spanning 1,347 observations of 301 perennial plant species surveyed across 326 plots from 6 continents. Crossing an aridity threshold of approximately 0.7 (close to the transition between semi-arid and arid zones) led to an unexpected 88% increase in trait diversity. This threshold appeared in the presence of grazers, and moved toward lower aridity levels with increasing grazing pressure. Moreover, 57% of observed trait diversity occurred only in the most arid and grazed drylands, highlighting the phenotypic uniqueness of these extreme environments. Our work indicates that drylands act as a global reservoir of plant phenotypic diversity and challenge the pervasive view that harsh environmental conditions reduce plant trait diversity8,9,10. They also highlight that many alternative strategies may enable plants to cope with increases in environmental stress induced by climate change and land-use intensification.This research was funded by the European Research Council (ERC Grant agreement 647038 1004 [BIODESERT]) and Generalitat Valenciana (CIDEGENT/2018/041). N.G. was supported by CAP 20–25 (16-IDEX-0001) and the AgreenSkills+ fellowship programme which has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement FP7-609398 (AgreenSkills+ contract). F.T.M. acknowledges support from the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), the KAUST Climate and Livability Initiative, the University of Alicante (UADIF22-74 and VIGROB22-350), the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (PID2020-116578RB-I00), and the Synthesis Center (sDiv) of the German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research Halle–Jena–Leipzig (iDiv). Y.L.B.-P. was supported by a Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions Individual Fellowship (MSCA-1018 IF) within the European Program Horizon 2020 (DRYFUN Project 656035). H.S. is supported by a María Zambrano fellowship funded by the Ministry of Universities and European Union-Next Generation plan. L.W. acknowledges support from the US National Science Foundation (EAR 1554894). G.M.W. acknowledges support from the Australian Research Council (DP210102593) and TERN. M.B is supported by a Ramón y Cajal grant from Spanish Ministry of Science (RYC2021-031797-I). L.v.d.B. and K.T. were supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG) Priority Program SPP-1803 (TI388/14-1). A.F. acknowledges the financial support from ANID PIA/BASAL FB210006 and Millenium Science Initiative Program NCN2021-050. A.J. was supported by the Bavarian Research Alliance for travel and field work (BayIntAn UBT 2017 61). A.L. and L.K. acknowledge support from the German Research Foundation, DFG (grant CRC TRR228) and German Federal Government for Science and Education, BMBF (grants 01LL1802C and 01LC1821A). B.B. and S.U. were supported by the Taylor Family-Asia Foundation Endowed Chair in Ecology and Conservation Biology. P.J.R. and A.J.M. acknowledge support from Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional through the FEDER Andalucía operative programme, FEDER-UJA 1261180 project. E.M.-J. and C.P. acknowledge support from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (PID2020-116578RB-I00). D.J.E. was supported by the Hermon Slade Foundation. J.D. and A.Rodríguez acknowledge support from the FCT (2020.03670.CEECIND and SFRH/BDP/108913/2015, respectively), as well as from the MCTES, FSE, UE and the CFE (UIDB/04004/2021) research unit financed by FCT/MCTES through national funds (PIDDAC). S.C.R. acknowledges support from the US Department of Energy (DE-SC-0008168), US Department of Defense (RC18-1322), and the US Geological Survey Ecosystems Mission Area. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the US government. E.H.-S. acknowledges support from Mexican National Science and Technology Council (CONACYT PN 5036 and 319059). A.N. and C. Branquinho. acknowledge the support from FCT—Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (CEECIND/02453/2018/CP1534/CT0001, PTDC/ASP-SIL/7743/ 2020, UIDB/00329/2020), from AdaptForGrazing project (PRR-C05-i03-I-000035) and from LTsER Montado platform (LTER_EU_PT_001). Field work of G.P. and J.M.Z. was supported by UNRN (PI 40-C-873).Peer reviewe

Towards a predictive framework for biocrust mediation of plant performance: A meta-analysis

Understanding the importance of biotic interactions in driving the distribution and abundance of species is a central goal of plant ecology. Early vascular plants likely colonized land occupied by biocrusts — photoautotrophic, surface‐dwelling soil communities comprised of cyanobacteria, bryophytes, lichens and fungi — suggesting biotic interactions between biocrusts and plants have been at play for some 2,000 million years. Today, biocrusts coexist with plants in dryland ecosystems worldwide, and have been shown to both facilitate or inhibit plant species performance depending on ecological context. Yet, the factors that drive the direction and magnitude of these effects remain largely unknown. We conducted a meta‐analysis of plant responses to biocrusts using a global dataset encompassing 1,004 studies from six continents. Meta‐analysis revealed there is no simple positive or negative effect of biocrusts on plants. Rather, plant responses differ by biocrust composition and plant species traits and vary across plant ontogeny. Moss‐dominated biocrusts facilitated, while lichen‐dominated biocrusts inhibited overall plant performance. Plant responses also varied among plant functional groups: C4 grasses received greater benefits from biocrusts compared to C3 grasses, and plants without N‐fixing symbionts responded more positively to biocrusts than plants with N‐fixing symbionts. Biocrusts decreased germination but facilitated growth of non‐native plant species. Synthesis. Results suggest that interspecific variation in plant responses to biocrusts, contingent on biocrust type, plant traits, and ontogeny can have strong impacts on plant species performance. These findings have important implications for understanding biocrust contributions to plant productivity and community assembly processes in ecosystems worldwide

Grass-Shrub Associations over a Precipitation Gradient and Their Implications for Restoration in the Great Basin, USA

As environmental stress increases positive (facilitative) plant interactions often predominate. Plant-plant associations (or lack thereof) can indicate whether certain plant species favor particular types of microsites (e.g., shrub canopies or plant-free interspaces) and can provide valuable insights into whether “nurse plants” will contribute to seeding or planting success during ecological restoration. It can be difficult, however, to anticipate how relationships between nurse plants and plants used for restoration may change over large-ranging, regional stress gradients. We investigated associations between the shrub, Wyoming big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. wyomingensis), and three common native grasses (Poa secunda, Elymus elymoides, and Pseudoroegneria spicata), representing short-, medium-, and deep-rooted growth forms, respectively, across an annual rainfall gradient (220–350 mm) in the Great Basin, USA. We hypothesized that positive shrub-grass relationships would become more frequent at lower rainfall levels, as indicated by greater cover of grasses in shrub canopies than vegetation-free interspaces. We sampled aerial cover, density, height, basal width, grazing status, and reproductive status of perennial grasses in canopies and interspaces of 25–33 sagebrush individuals at 32 sites along a rainfall gradient. We found that aerial cover of the shallow rooted grass, P. secunda, was higher in sagebrush canopy than interspace microsites at lower levels of rainfall. Cover and density of the medium-rooted grass, E. elymoides were higher in sagebrush canopies than interspaces at all but the highest rainfall levels. Neither annual rainfall nor sagebrush canopy microsite significantly affected P. spicata cover. E. elymoides and P. spicata plants were taller, narrower, and less likely to be grazed in shrub canopy microsites than interspaces. Our results suggest that exploring sagebrush canopy microsites for restoration of native perennial grasses might improve plant establishment, growth, or survival (or some combination thereof), particularly in drier areas. We suggest that land managers consider the nurse plant approach as a way to increase perennial grass abundance in the Great Basin. Controlled experimentation will provide further insights into the life stage-specific effectiveness and practicality of a nurse plant approach for ecological restoration in this region

What is a biocrust? A refined, contemporary definition for a broadening research community

Studies of biological soil crusts (biocrusts) have proliferated over the last few decades. The biocrust literature has broadened, with more studies assessing and describing the function of a variety of biocrust communities in a broad range of biomes and habitats and across a large spectrum of disciplines, and also by the incorporation of biocrusts into global perspectives and biogeochemical models. As the number of biocrust researchers increases, along with the scope of soil communities defined as ‘biocrust’, it is worth asking whether we all share a clear, universal, and fully articulated definition of what constitutes a biocrust. In this review, we synthesize the literature with the views of new and experienced biocrust researchers, to provide a refined and fully elaborated definition of biocrusts. In doing so, we illustrate the ecological relevance and ecosystem services provided by them. We demonstrate that biocrusts are defined by four distinct elements: physical structure, functional characteristics, habitat, and taxonomic composition. We describe outgroups, which have some, but not all, of the characteristics necessary to be fully consistent with our definition and thus would not be considered biocrusts. We also summarize the wide variety of different types of communities that fall under our definition of biocrusts, in the process of highlighting their global distribution. Finally, we suggest the universal use of the Belnap, Büdel & Lange definition, with minor modifications: Biological soil crusts (biocrusts) result from an intimate association between soil particles and differing proportions of photoautotrophic (e.g. cyanobacteria, algae, lichens, bryophytes) and heterotrophic (e.g. bacteria, fungi, archaea) organisms, which live within, or immediately on top of, the uppermost millimetres of soil. Soil particles are aggregated through the presence and activity of these often extremotolerant biota that desiccate regularly, and the resultant living crust covers the surface of the ground as a coherent layer. With this detailed definition of biocrusts, illustrating their ecological functions and widespread distribution, we hope to stimulate interest in biocrust research and inform various stakeholders (e.g. land managers, land users) on their overall importance to ecosystem and Earth system functioning.This work was conducted as part of the “Completing the dryland puzzle: creating a predictive framework for biological soil crust function and response to climate change” Working Group supported by the John Wesley Powell Center for Analysis and Synthesis, funded by the U.S. Geological Survey. V.B.C. is funded by the National Science Foundation (DEB-1844531). F.T.M. acknowledges support from the European Research Council (ERC Grant Agreement 647038 [BIODESERT]) and Generalitat Valenciana (CIDEGENT/2018/041). K.E.Y. and A.D.-N. were supported by the National Science Foundation (#1557162 & #1557135). E.R.-C. was supported by the Ramon y Cajal fellowship (RYC2020-030762-I) and the REBIOARID Project (2018-101921-B-I00) founded by FEDER/Ministerio de Ciencia e Inovacion-Agencia estatal de investigacion, and the BIOCOST project (Conservación debiocostras como estrategia de adaptación al cambio climático: alineando avances científicos con la gestión y sociedad) supported by the Biodiversity Foundation of the Ministry for the Ecological Transition and the Demographic Challenge. S.C.R. was supported by USGS Ecosystems Mission Area. E.H.-S. acknowledges financial support from CONACYT grant SEP-CB-2015-01-251388